Vinay Sajip <vinay_sajip <at> yahoo.co.uk> writes:
>
> This seems perhaps usable for a Formatter instantiation (infrequent) but a
> problem for the case where you want to convert format_str + args -> message
> (potentially frequent, and less readable).
Why is it a problem? I don't understand. It certainly is less pleasant to write
"{foo}".format or "{0} {1}".format than it is to write "{0} {1}" alone, but it's
still prettier and easier to remember than the special wrappers people are
proposing here.
> Another problem is that logging
> calls already use keyword arguments (extra, exc_info) and so backward
> compatibility might be compromised.
Then logging can just keep recognizing those special keyword arguments, and
forward the others to the formatting function.
> It also feels like passing a callable could
> encourage patterns of usage which restrict our flexibility for future changes:
Which future changes are you thinking about? AFAIK, there hasn't been a single
change in logging output formatting in years. Rejecting a present change on the
basis that it "restricts our flexibility for future changes" sounds like the
worst kind of argument to me :-)
> That's more flexible, to be sure, but more specialized formatting
> requirements are already catered for using e.g. the PercentMessage/BraceMessage
> approach.
Except that having to wrap format strings with "PercentMessage" or
"BraceMessage" is horrible. Python is not Java.
Regards
Antoine.
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4